A Systematic Review on Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography (PSMA PET) Evaluating Localized Low- to Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Tool to Improve Risk Stratification for Active Surveillance?

Active surveillance remains a treatment option for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) has emerged as a useful modality to assess intraprostatic lesions. This systematic review aims to evaluate PSMA PET/CT in localized low- to intermediate-risk PCa to determine its role in active surveillance. Following PRISMA guidelines, a search was performed on Medline, Embase, and Scopus. Only studies evaluating PSMA PET/CT in localized low- to intermediate-risk PCa were included. Studies were excluded if patients received previous treatment, or if they included high-risk PCa. The search yielded 335 articles, of which only four publications were suitable for inclusion. One prospective study demonstrated that PSMA PET/CT-targeted biopsy has superior diagnostic accuracy when compared to mpMRI. One prospective and one retrospective study demonstrated MRI occult lesions in 12.3-29% of patients, of which up to 10% may harbor underlying unfavorable pathology. The last retrospective study demonstrated the ability of PSMA PET/CT to predict the volume of Gleason pattern 4 disease. Early evidence demonstrated the utility of PSMA PET/CT as a tool in making AS safer by detecting MRI occult lesions and patients at risk of upgrading of disease.

Impact of first-line FOLFIRINOX versus Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel chemotherapy on survival in advanced pancreatic cancer: Evidence from the prospective international multicentre PURPLE pancreatic cancer registry.

BACKGROUND: First-line palliative chemotherapy regimens in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have not been compared in head-to-head phase III randomised controlled trials (RCT). Data on optimum first-line treatment and subsequent sequencing is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival (OS) between first-line treatment regimens in a real-world population to determine if an optimal therapeutic sequence is associated with survival benefit. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collated data from the Australasian PURPLE pancreatic cancer registry was undertaken. FINDINGS: From 2016 to 2020, of 1551 pancreatic cancer patients, 615 received palliative-intent chemotherapy. Patients with early-stage resected disease without recurrence (n = 369), radiotherapy alone (n = 43), received supportive care alone (n = 458) or had less than 3 months follow-up (n = 66) were excluded. Median OS was comparable between patients receiving first-line Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel (n = 376) and those receiving FOLFIRINOX (n = 73) (11.3 versus 12.3 months, P = 0.37), with 38% proceeding to second-line chemotherapy which was associated with longer mOS compared to first-line treatment alone (17.4 versus 8.2 months, P < 0.001). With second-line treatment following prior FOLFIRINOX (n = 29) or Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel (n = 101), mOS did not differ significantly (17.3 versus 15.9 months, P = 0.92), respectively, whilst median progression-free survival was longer with prior FOLFIRINOX (5.2 versus 2.9 months, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in overall survival between either first-line chemotherapy choice, despite patients receiving FOLFIRINOX being younger, fitter, and more likely to have localised disease. However, FOLFIRINOX was associated with delayed progression. In the absence of phase III RCT data, clinicians should be comfortable using either Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX as first-line therapy in advanced PDAC.